April 20, 2008 at 6:54 am #1064robParticipant
Do you guys see a distinction between these two terms? Like, a movie is something you watch with popcorn, and a film is something you watch that feels like art, at least, that’s how I see it. Does that make sense?
I was watching Lars and the Real Girl and started thinking about that. Like, the Indiana Jones movies definitely feel like movies, but No Country for Old Men is a film, you know? Am I just weird?
I should be working in that business, that’s all I gotta say.April 20, 2008 at 12:59 pm #12848OctaviousParticipant
I see what you mean. Star Wars: movie. Big Fish: film.April 20, 2008 at 4:21 pm #12844Version3Keymaster
I still think Big Fish sucked.
I know that is the distinction people want to make, but I think it’s one of those self-important things someone started to make them sound like they knew more, or had more to say than the average bear, and people have picked up, sometimes for similar reasons, and sometimes because of the need to just separate the two. I identify with the distinction, but think it’s silly. That’s just like if an auto enthusiast wanted to call a VW a car, and a Ferrari and automobile; or if an architect or someone in the housing industry or interior design wanted to make the distinction between a house and a home, or a house and a domicile. You can probably identify with their point when they make it ( like if they said this house was put together quickly, and looks like all of the other ones on the street, but this one over here has character and that makes it a home ). But it still probably wouldn’t change how you would identify them in your everyday life. So, I see the the differences the people make between the two, but I think it’s goofy; almost as if you aren’t really into movies in a respectable fashion unless you make the same distinction. I’d think the same thing of the other two examples. I just think there is a difference between entertainment and art, but I don’t know that it’s purely identified by the use of one of those two terms.
Not trying to offend, this is just what I think about it.
Now Rob… I know that you’d be excited to work within or in proximity of that industry, but what would you do? Not dream job necessarily, but realism; what would you like to be doing. I guess my question is, assuming you wouldn’t be the next break-out or top of the industry food chain ______, what would you want to be doing in the industry?April 20, 2008 at 6:48 pm #12846robParticipant
I’ve thought about it, and I think I could be happy doing just about anything in the business. I don’t know what a key grip actually does, but I think I’d like it. Promotions, marketing, production, pre-production — I just don’t know, anything, really. I’m still working on tweaking my ideas for my story.
I know that the distinction’s not really important, I was just trying to make a point. For the most part, a director can only make one or the other. Like, George Lucas makes movies, they’re not important, they’re just entertainment. Spielberg’s one of the few that can make either one, and make them well. I don’t know, it was just a thought.April 20, 2008 at 9:40 pm #12850El RustirinoParticipant
Yeah, I think there’s a distinction, and you’re probably right about what it is. But it’s not a distinction that people actually think about – it still exists, though.
Bryan, this list of things I like that you don’t keeps getting longer. I love Big Fish.April 20, 2008 at 10:38 pm #12849BingParticipant
Big Fish made everyone in the movies cry and then when they left no one could see how to drive and they all ran over babies in the parking lot.
And what about Porno Movies?
And Snuff Films?
Now gimme a large buttered popcorn and don’t skimp on the butter, a pack of Reese’s and a small diet coke. Also if I hear any talking during the movie I am gonna turn into “that guy”…
My personal favorites were the crap info-edu-docu-public service films in school….. you know those cheap 1970’s films with crap sound and everything was slightly yellow. I think there was one guy who voiced every damn one of them.April 21, 2008 at 4:29 am #12845Version3Keymaster
I agree with Rob about directors only being capable of making one or the other in most cases… Spielberg is one of the very few that can do both, but we all know he’s an alien anyway.
Rusty, that will be true with most people that make a list with me. I hate most things.April 21, 2008 at 9:20 am #12847digitaltopiaParticipantrob wrote:I’ve thought about it, and I think I could be happy doing just about anything in the business. I don’t know what a key grip actually does, but I think I’d like it. Promotions, marketing, production, pre-production — I just don’t know, anything, really. I’m still working on tweaking my ideas for my story.
I know that the distinction’s not really important, I was just trying to make a point. For the most part, a director can only make one or the other. Like, George Lucas makes movies, they’re not important, they’re just entertainment. Spielberg’s one of the few that can make either one, and make them well. I don’t know, it was just a thought.
He’d like to do anything except be a fluffer, that is.
I usually refer to the distinction by either saying, “That was a fun movie, but nothing too serious,” or, “That was a great movie, it made me think, or was deep, or some such.” Sure that’s more words than just saying movie or film, but words are my friends.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.